Commercial gene expression tests for prostate cancer prognosis provide paradoxical estimates of race-specific risk
Jordan H Creed,
Anders E Berglund,
Robert J Rounbehler,
John L Cleveland,
Jong Y. Park,
Travis A Gerke
Posted 12 Apr 2019
bioRxiv DOI: 10.1101/604058 (published DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-19-0407)
Posted 12 Apr 2019
Background: Commercial gene expression signatures of prostate cancer (PCa) prognosis were developed and validated in cohorts of predominantly European American men (EAM). Limited research exists on the value of such signatures in African American men (AAM), who have poor PCa outcomes. We explored differences in gene expression between EAM and AAM for three commercially available panels recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network for PCa prognosis. Materials and Methods: 232 EAM and 95 AAM patients provided radical prostatectomy specimens. Gene expression was quantified using Nanostring for 60 genes spanning the Oncotype DX Prostate, Prolaris, and Decipher panels. A continuous expression-based risk score was approximated for each. Differential expression, intrapanel co-expression and risk by race were assessed. Results and limitations: Clinical and pathologic features were similar between AAM and EAM. Differential expression by race was observed for 48% of genes measured, though the magnitudes of expression differences were small. Co-expression patterns were more strongly preserved by race group for Oncotype DX and Decipher versus Prolaris (integrative correlations of 0.87, 0.73, and 0.62, respectively). Poorer prognosis was estimated in EAM versus AAM for Oncotype DX (p < 0.001), whereas no difference in prognosis was predicted between AAM and EAM using Prolaris or Decipher (p > 0.05). Replication of our findings directly on the commercial panels with long-term follow-up is warranted. Conclusions: Due to observed racial differences across three commercial gene expression panels for PCa prognosis, caution is warranted when applying these panels in clinical decision-making in AAM.
- Downloaded 282 times
- Download rankings, all-time:
- Site-wide: 100,062
- In epidemiology: 4,181
- Year to date:
- Site-wide: 132,378
- Since beginning of last month:
- Site-wide: 148,192
Downloads over time
Distribution of downloads per paper, site-wide
- 27 Nov 2020: The website and API now include results pulled from medRxiv as well as bioRxiv.
- 18 Dec 2019: We're pleased to announce PanLingua, a new tool that enables you to search for machine-translated bioRxiv preprints using more than 100 different languages.
- 21 May 2019: PLOS Biology has published a community page about Rxivist.org and its design.
- 10 May 2019: The paper analyzing the Rxivist dataset has been published at eLife.
- 1 Mar 2019: We now have summary statistics about bioRxiv downloads and submissions.
- 8 Feb 2019: Data from Altmetric is now available on the Rxivist details page for every preprint. Look for the "donut" under the download metrics.
- 30 Jan 2019: preLights has featured the Rxivist preprint and written about our findings.
- 22 Jan 2019: Nature just published an article about Rxivist and our data.
- 13 Jan 2019: The Rxivist preprint is live!